.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
I think they already did something similar (and funny) a few years ago dropping the ‘Store’ from... well, ‘Apple Store‘. What am I supposed to call them now, though? Apple shops? Apple retail outlets? Everybody still refers to them as ‘Apple Stores’ anyway.
Help me out, why are we expecting an iPhone 12 and not an iPhone 11S?
I don't see the point of "s" models anymore. Marketing is better with sequential numbering; less confusing. We haven't seen but two years with "s" models, iPhones 6s and 7s.
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.
You forgot the Xs & Xs Max. That makes 3 years of "S" models, with a break with the 8 model because they took it to 10 (X)!
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
Steve streamlined the product matrix through necessity. Apple wasn't being competitive with the products it had, pricing and manufacturing capacity.
Today, in the handset world, Apple definitely cannot compete by remaining in the premium price band with just two models.
The current situation (with more models) is a direct result of not being able to increase sales over four years. Change began in 2017 and is continuing, but again, through necessity.
I seldom agree with your analysis of Apple's marketing, as your bias towards another device maker is well known, and I don't with your take today. and for the record, there are three "premium" models today; two iPhone 11 Pro models, and the iPhone 11.
Apple actually took a fairly natural and evolutionary growth path to a wider, but still small set, of models over some 13 years of the iPhone. I would argue that the increase in models has more to do with Apple's Cupertino Headquarters completion, and increasing head count, than "market necessity" of increasing the models. Over those 13 years, Apple still maintains its leadership of revenues, margins, ASP's, and profits, over all of its competitors. I actually expect that Apple will launch a "super flagship" in a few years that will incorporate a higher level of leading/bleeding edge features and technology, but in a product initially designed to a much more constrained supply chain, due to the complexity of the technology, and maybe only a few million units a year, which would still be unlikely to meet demand in Apple's iPhone market.
I could make a compelling argument that your favorite device builder has way too many models, with little differentiation, which is a common theme in the Android OS device market, all driven by "necessity". Perhaps, it isn't too late for Huawei/Honor to focus on fewer models, and better marketing, but that is pointless, as Huawei doesn't compete much at all with Apple, and still has a ways to go to even compete well against Samsung, its main competitor.
For the record, I doubt that Apple will be able to increase sales beyond 200-220 million plus units in any given year, as the useful life cycle of the iPhone is so long, with the market bolstered by very valuable used iPhones. Still, you may be correct that Apple's desire to increase sales, and offset some ASP and margin loss against growth in services, will actually lead to unit sales growth for iPhone. That doesn't scream "necessity" as much as evolution in iPhone marketing in a mature market.
Interesting. I just wish Apple offered one ultimate iOS device: the iPhone, and a compact model: the iPhone SE. No mini, maxi, or pro. No selling older phones such as the XR. One Watch: the current one. Two iPads: the Pro and the iPad. And so on.
Why would you care if Apple offers more models? Your wish makes no sense at all. What next, two color choices again?
Read and re-read my posts if necessary. Quality and simplicity are the essence of Apple.
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
Totally disagree. There is no redundancy with the iPhone SE + 12 Mini - the 12 Mini is expected to be a little smaller than the (new) SE, but considerably more capable. I've no interest in the SE but I'm really looking forward to the 12 Mini. If anything, I'm disappointed that the 12 Mini isn't going to be even smaller (I would absolutely love something the size of an iPhone 4, but with a full-face screen).
The issue with mid-90s Apple was that they had a lot of machines with overlapping price points and capabilities, with confusing names that gave no indication of how the machines compared to each other. This upcoming range is really not at all complicated - for the most part, there's a clear delineation by size, and there will also be a clear delineation by price. There will only be two models that are the same size as each other - the 12 and 12 Pro - and then it will be clear by name and price which is the more capable device.
I really hope Apple’s management realises soon how bad an idea an iPhone ‘family’ is. They seem to be forgetting where such bloated line-ups got them in the 90s. Steve streamlined Apple’s offerings for a (very) good reason☝
Now SIRIously it’s probably going to be iPhone SE + ‘mini’ (redundancy!) + ‘12’ + ‘Pro’ + ‘Pro Max’. High time Apple thought different (again).
Steve streamlined the product matrix through necessity. Apple wasn't being competitive with the products it had, pricing and manufacturing capacity.
Today, in the handset world, Apple definitely cannot compete by remaining in the premium price band with just two models.
The current situation (with more models) is a direct result of not being able to increase sales over four years. Change began in 2017 and is continuing, but again, through necessity.
I seldom agree with your analysis of Apple's marketing, as your bias towards another device maker is well known, and I don't with your take today. and for the record, there are three "premium" models today; two iPhone 11 Pro models, and the iPhone 11.
Apple actually took a fairly natural and evolutionary growth path to a wider, but still small set, of models over some 13 years of the iPhone. I would argue that the increase in models has more to do with Apple's Cupertino Headquarters completion, and increasing head count, than "market necessity" of increasing the models. Over those 13 years, Apple still maintains its leadership of revenues, margins, ASP's, and profits, over all of its competitors. I actually expect that Apple will launch a "super flagship" in a few years that will incorporate a higher level of leading/bleeding edge features and technology, but in a product initially designed to a much more constrained supply chain, due to the complexity of the technology, and maybe only a few million units a year, which would still be unlikely to meet demand in Apple's iPhone market.
I could make a compelling argument that your favorite device builder has way too many models, with little differentiation, which is a common theme in the Android OS device market, all driven by "necessity". Perhaps, it isn't too late for Huawei/Honor to focus on fewer models, and better marketing, but that is pointless, as Huawei doesn't compete much at all with Apple, and still has a ways to go to even compete well against Samsung, its main competitor.
For the record, I doubt that Apple will be able to increase sales beyond 200-220 million plus units in any given year, as the useful life cycle of the iPhone is so long, with the market bolstered by very valuable used iPhones. Still, you may be correct that Apple's desire to increase sales, and offset some ASP and margin loss against growth in services, will actually lead to unit sales growth for iPhone. That doesn't scream "necessity" as much as evolution in iPhone marketing in a mature market.
Interesting. I just wish Apple offered one ultimate iOS device: the iPhone, and a compact model: the iPhone SE. No mini, maxi, or pro. No selling older phones such as the XR. One Watch: the current one. Two iPads: the Pro and the iPad. And so on.
Why would you care if Apple offers more models? Your wish makes no sense at all. What next, two color choices again?
Read and re-read my posts if necessary. Quality and simplicity are the essence of Apple.
When you have iPhone user base of over 900 million, I don't think that a handful of models is out of line, and quality hasn't suffered.
Help me out, why are we expecting an iPhone 12 and not an iPhone 11S?
I don't see the point of "s" models anymore. Marketing is better with sequential numbering; less confusing. We haven't seen but two years with "s" models, iPhones 6s and 7s.
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.
You forgot the Xs & Xs Max. That makes 3 years of "S" models, with a break with the 8 model because they took it to 10 (X)!
Help me out, why are we expecting an iPhone 12 and not an iPhone 11S?
I don't see the point of "s" models anymore. Marketing is better with sequential numbering; less confusing. We haven't seen but two years with "s" models, iPhones 6s and 7s.
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.
You forgot the Xs & Xs Max. That makes 3 years of "S" models, with a break with the 8 model because they took it to 10 (X)!
True!
But the "S" models were always used when the external form factor and major features stayed mostly the same while internals were upgraded.
This year, with the introduction of 5G, OLED screens across the board, a new case design and upgraded cameras, that won't be the case.
.... Next year could see an "S" model but not this year.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
I think they already did something similar (and funny) a few years ago dropping the ‘Store’ from... well, ‘Apple Store‘. What am I supposed to call them now, though? Apple shops? Apple retail outlets? Everybody still refers to them as ‘Apple Stores’ anyway.
The retail app on my phone is called “Apple Store.” When I open that to find the nearest bricks-and-mortar location, that is also referred to as “Apple Store.” I don’t recall them ever dropping the “Store” part, but if they did, they’ve put it back.
Mind you, when you look at a physical location, it’s graphically represented without text, much like an iconic Beatles album cover. You walk up to it to see an Apple logo and a store beneath. “Apple Store,” in every language. (The referenced album cover depicts, without text, the Beatles walking across Abbey Road.)
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
The only problem with your idea is that Apple already goes against your advice by calling their products "Apple" like "Apple Watch", "Apple TV", "Apple Music", "Apple News+", and so on. So it's very consistent to use the word "Apple" as part of their product name. It's not awkward at all. Have you ever called those product names "awkward" before? If so, I will apologize.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
Let’s try this again, but I’ll write slower this time.
“Apple Watch” is a watch, made by Apple. “Apple TV” is a TV device... made by Apple.
If you start calling the computer made by Apple the, uh, Apple, then you have the “Apple Apple.”
Awkward.
But that’s ok, because everyone would still call it a Mac.
Go back and reread my post. I said the computers should be called "Apple Mini", "Apple Pro,", "Apple Air", etc. I did not say "Apple Apple". I said the word Apple replaces the word "Mac" brand not the computer model component.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
The only problem with your idea is that Apple already goes against your advice by calling their products "Apple" like "Apple Watch", "Apple TV", "Apple Music", "Apple News+", and so on. So it's very consistent to use the word "Apple" as part of their product name. It's not awkward at all. Have you ever called those product names "awkward" before? If so, I will apologize.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
Let’s try this again, but I’ll write slower this time.
“Apple Watch” is a watch, made by Apple. “Apple TV” is a TV device... made by Apple.
If you start calling the computer made by Apple the, uh, Apple, then you have the “Apple Apple.”
Awkward.
But that’s ok, because everyone would still call it a Mac.
Go back and reread my post. I said the computers should be called "Apple Mini", "Apple Pro,", "Apple Air", etc. I did not say "Apple Apple". I said the word Apple replaces the word "Mac" brand not the computer model component.
You are persistent, aren't you? I read your post; did you? The naming convention goes Manufacturer -> Device -> Device subcategory or model (if there is one). A-> B-> C. It follows a logical pattern. So, for instance, you have Apple TV 4K. Apple iPhone 11s. Apple MacBook Pro. In some cases, Apple is inferred and left off, but it's there. Everything already starts with Apple.
Your idea isn't what you think it is. You're either calling the device "Mini," "Pro," and "Air," and including the ever-present Apple manufacturer name in front of that, or you're calling them Apple Apple Mini, Apple Apple Pro, and Apple Apple Air. I suppose there's a third option, and you're eliminating the name of the device entirely, and skipping from A-> C. That's impenetrably confusing, too.
I was being polite calling that awkward. It is (still trying to be polite) completely, irrevocably nonsensical, and based on a nonexistent premise you've made up, that the name Mac is somehow problematic from a marketing standpoint. It isn't. They're not going to stop calling a Mac a Mac. The name is iconic and indelible.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
The only problem with your idea is that Apple already goes against your advice by calling their products "Apple" like "Apple Watch", "Apple TV", "Apple Music", "Apple News+", and so on. So it's very consistent to use the word "Apple" as part of their product name. It's not awkward at all. Have you ever called those product names "awkward" before? If so, I will apologize.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
Let’s try this again, but I’ll write slower this time.
“Apple Watch” is a watch, made by Apple. “Apple TV” is a TV device... made by Apple.
If you start calling the computer made by Apple the, uh, Apple, then you have the “Apple Apple.”
Awkward.
But that’s ok, because everyone would still call it a Mac.
Go back and reread my post. I said the computers should be called "Apple Mini", "Apple Pro,", "Apple Air", etc. I did not say "Apple Apple". I said the word Apple replaces the word "Mac" brand not the computer model component.
You are persistent, aren't you? I read your post; did you? The naming convention goes Manufacturer -> Device -> Device subcategory or model (if there is one). A-> B-> C. It follows a logical pattern. So, for instance, you have Apple TV 4K. Apple iPhone 11s. Apple MacBook Pro. In some cases, Apple is inferred and left off, but it's there. Everything already starts with Apple.
Your idea isn't what you think it is. You're either calling the device "Mini," "Pro," and "Air," and including the ever-present Apple manufacturer name in front of that, or you're calling them Apple Apple Mini, Apple Apple Pro, and Apple Apple Air. I suppose there's a third option, and you're eliminating the name of the device entirely, and skipping from A-> C. That's impenetrably confusing, too.
I was being polite calling that awkward. It is (still trying to be polite) completely, irrevocably nonsensical, and based on a nonexistent premise you've made up, that the name Mac is somehow problematic from a marketing standpoint. It isn't. They're not going to stop calling a Mac a Mac. The name is iconic and indelible.
You are ignoring my point that many of Apple's product names actually include the word "Apple". I gave several examples. Under your silly theory the "Apple TV 4K" is Manufacturer-=Apple, Product=TV, Subproduct=4K. That's nonsense. The actual product name is "Apple TV". It is not "TV". You can't trademark a generic word like "TV" so the Apple product trademark is actually "Apple TV."
And I admit there's only a 15% chance that Apple will rebrand Macs, but if they do, you need to get down on your knees and beg for forgiveness.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
To be fair Apple's first computers were called "Apple". I think the idea is great in theory but bad in practice.
I like the idea of the Mac being rebranded as something new and better but I do not think "Apple" is it in 2020 when people know Apple as the umbrella company for great products.
Help me out, why are we expecting an iPhone 12 and not an iPhone 11S?
I don't see the point of "s" models anymore. Marketing is better with sequential numbering; less confusing. We haven't seen but two years with "s" models, iPhones 6s and 7s.
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.
You forgot the Xs & Xs Max. That makes 3 years of "S" models, with a break with the 8 model because they took it to 10 (X)!
Um What? There was no "7s" and there were older "s" models like iPhone 4s and 5s.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
To be fair Apple's first computers were called "Apple". I think the idea is great in theory but bad in practice.
I like the idea of the Mac being rebranded as something new and better but I do not think "Apple" is it in 2020 when people know Apple as the umbrella company for great products.
Sure, but that only made sense because the company was called Apple Computers, and they only had one product.
I’m trying to imagine the collective confusion followed by collective derision if Tim Cook were to say something in a presentation like, “We here at Apple are all about simplicity, so with our own Apple silicon at its heart, I’m thrilled to introduce to you the new... Apple!”
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
The only problem with your idea is that Apple already goes against your advice by calling their products "Apple" like "Apple Watch", "Apple TV", "Apple Music", "Apple News+", and so on. So it's very consistent to use the word "Apple" as part of their product name. It's not awkward at all. Have you ever called those product names "awkward" before? If so, I will apologize.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
Let’s try this again, but I’ll write slower this time.
“Apple Watch” is a watch, made by Apple. “Apple TV” is a TV device... made by Apple.
If you start calling the computer made by Apple the, uh, Apple, then you have the “Apple Apple.”
Awkward.
But that’s ok, because everyone would still call it a Mac.
Go back and reread my post. I said the computers should be called "Apple Mini", "Apple Pro,", "Apple Air", etc. I did not say "Apple Apple". I said the word Apple replaces the word "Mac" brand not the computer model component.
You are persistent, aren't you? I read your post; did you? The naming convention goes Manufacturer -> Device -> Device subcategory or model (if there is one). A-> B-> C. It follows a logical pattern. So, for instance, you have Apple TV 4K. Apple iPhone 11s. Apple MacBook Pro. In some cases, Apple is inferred and left off, but it's there. Everything already starts with Apple.
Your idea isn't what you think it is. You're either calling the device "Mini," "Pro," and "Air," and including the ever-present Apple manufacturer name in front of that, or you're calling them Apple Apple Mini, Apple Apple Pro, and Apple Apple Air. I suppose there's a third option, and you're eliminating the name of the device entirely, and skipping from A-> C. That's impenetrably confusing, too.
I was being polite calling that awkward. It is (still trying to be polite) completely, irrevocably nonsensical, and based on a nonexistent premise you've made up, that the name Mac is somehow problematic from a marketing standpoint. It isn't. They're not going to stop calling a Mac a Mac. The name is iconic and indelible.
You are ignoring my point that many of Apple's product names actually include the word "Apple". I gave several examples. Under your silly theory the "Apple TV 4K" is Manufacturer-=Apple, Product=TV, Subproduct=4K. That's nonsense. The actual product name is "Apple TV". It is not "TV". You can't trademark a generic word like "TV" so the Apple product trademark is actually "Apple TV."
And I admit there's only a 15% chance that Apple will rebrand Macs, but if they do, you need to get down on your knees and beg for forgiveness.
Well, that hardly seems fair. At what point when your silly idea doesn’t happen will you be getting down on your knees to beg forgiveness?
Help me out, why are we expecting an iPhone 12 and not an iPhone 11S?
I don't see the point of "s" models anymore. Marketing is better with sequential numbering; less confusing. We haven't seen but two years with "s" models, iPhones 6s and 7s.
I suspect that Apple will continue with replacing the current lineup each year, and push down the previous low end model as the midrange model in the lineup. So we should see an iPhone 11 as the midrange model this year, plus the speculated mini, 12, and the two 12 Pro models. That's 5 models plus the SE.
Whether there will be a old and new model of the mini in the lineup next year is a great question.
You forgot the Xs & Xs Max. That makes 3 years of "S" models, with a break with the 8 model because they took it to 10 (X)!
True!
But the "S" models were always used when the external form factor and major features stayed mostly the same while internals were upgraded.
This year, with the introduction of 5G, OLED screens across the board, a new case design and upgraded cameras, that won't be the case.
.... Next year could see an "S" model but not this year.
This. The 's' models were always incremental improvements from a more major redesign the year prior. If the rumors are correct, this year's phone will be a more major redesign, Further more, if they add 5G capabilities as most people expect, I don't think they'll want to link it to the 11 by calling it an '11s.' They'll want to call it something more differentiating.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
The only problem with your idea is that Apple already goes against your advice by calling their products "Apple" like "Apple Watch", "Apple TV", "Apple Music", "Apple News+", and so on. So it's very consistent to use the word "Apple" as part of their product name. It's not awkward at all. Have you ever called those product names "awkward" before? If so, I will apologize.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
Let’s try this again, but I’ll write slower this time.
“Apple Watch” is a watch, made by Apple. “Apple TV” is a TV device... made by Apple.
If you start calling the computer made by Apple the, uh, Apple, then you have the “Apple Apple.”
Awkward.
But that’s ok, because everyone would still call it a Mac.
Go back and reread my post. I said the computers should be called "Apple Mini", "Apple Pro,", "Apple Air", etc. I did not say "Apple Apple". I said the word Apple replaces the word "Mac" brand not the computer model component.
You are persistent, aren't you? I read your post; did you? The naming convention goes Manufacturer -> Device -> Device subcategory or model (if there is one). A-> B-> C. It follows a logical pattern. So, for instance, you have Apple TV 4K. Apple iPhone 11s. Apple MacBook Pro. In some cases, Apple is inferred and left off, but it's there. Everything already starts with Apple.
Your idea isn't what you think it is. You're either calling the device "Mini," "Pro," and "Air," and including the ever-present Apple manufacturer name in front of that, or you're calling them Apple Apple Mini, Apple Apple Pro, and Apple Apple Air. I suppose there's a third option, and you're eliminating the name of the device entirely, and skipping from A-> C. That's impenetrably confusing, too.
I was being polite calling that awkward. It is (still trying to be polite) completely, irrevocably nonsensical, and based on a nonexistent premise you've made up, that the name Mac is somehow problematic from a marketing standpoint. It isn't. They're not going to stop calling a Mac a Mac. The name is iconic and indelible.
You are ignoring my point that many of Apple's product names actually include the word "Apple". I gave several examples. Under your silly theory the "Apple TV 4K" is Manufacturer-=Apple, Product=TV, Subproduct=4K. That's nonsense. The actual product name is "Apple TV". It is not "TV". You can't trademark a generic word like "TV" so the Apple product trademark is actually "Apple TV."
And I admit there's only a 15% chance that Apple will rebrand Macs, but if they do, you need to get down on your knees and beg for forgiveness.
Well, that hardly seems fair. At what point when your silly idea doesn’t happen will you be getting down on your knees to beg forgiveness?
I've already admitted there's an 85% chance that you will be right. So if you end up being right, I've got no need to apologize. In fact, I'll go so far as to say there's a 98% chance you will be right. But if I'm right it's like shooting a bulls-eye from 2 miles away with a pistol. And everyone, including you, will need to acknowledge my prescience.
.... Of course, when I make predictions I'm usually wrong. Regardless, I'll reiterate my other prediction that the new Apple Silicon Macs will drop the name "Mac" and replace it with "Apple", i.e., Apple Mini, Apple Book Pro, Apple Air, etc. That's because the word "Apple" has a strong positive brand image but "Mac" has a mixed image. ...
Wut?
That would be like dropping the name "Band Aid" and calling them "Johnson & Johnson Adhesive Strips."
Yes, you are dead right, it would be like that, except that the term "Apple" is the most valuable brand name in the world, while Johnson and Johnson isn't even in the top 100. https://www.forbes.com/the-worlds-most-valuable-brands <-- So Apple's new line of computers would benefit by using the most valuable brand name in the world.
Literally no one refers to their device that runs on MacOS as their Apple.
Literally everyone would continue to refer to their device that runs on MacOS as their Mac if they changed its name to something else.
Apple is the name of the company. The products that Apple makes all have other names. Calling one of the products they make an Apple would effectively make it an Apple Apple.
That seems a little awkward.
The only problem with your idea is that Apple already goes against your advice by calling their products "Apple" like "Apple Watch", "Apple TV", "Apple Music", "Apple News+", and so on. So it's very consistent to use the word "Apple" as part of their product name. It's not awkward at all. Have you ever called those product names "awkward" before? If so, I will apologize.
But hey, I know my prediction isn't likely to come true, because it's a very specific and dramatic change. We'll find out before New Year's Day, according to Tim Cook.
Let’s try this again, but I’ll write slower this time.
“Apple Watch” is a watch, made by Apple. “Apple TV” is a TV device... made by Apple.
If you start calling the computer made by Apple the, uh, Apple, then you have the “Apple Apple.”
Awkward.
But that’s ok, because everyone would still call it a Mac.
Go back and reread my post. I said the computers should be called "Apple Mini", "Apple Pro,", "Apple Air", etc. I did not say "Apple Apple". I said the word Apple replaces the word "Mac" brand not the computer model component.
You are persistent, aren't you? I read your post; did you? The naming convention goes Manufacturer -> Device -> Device subcategory or model (if there is one). A-> B-> C. It follows a logical pattern. So, for instance, you have Apple TV 4K. Apple iPhone 11s. Apple MacBook Pro. In some cases, Apple is inferred and left off, but it's there. Everything already starts with Apple.
Your idea isn't what you think it is. You're either calling the device "Mini," "Pro," and "Air," and including the ever-present Apple manufacturer name in front of that, or you're calling them Apple Apple Mini, Apple Apple Pro, and Apple Apple Air. I suppose there's a third option, and you're eliminating the name of the device entirely, and skipping from A-> C. That's impenetrably confusing, too.
I was being polite calling that awkward. It is (still trying to be polite) completely, irrevocably nonsensical, and based on a nonexistent premise you've made up, that the name Mac is somehow problematic from a marketing standpoint. It isn't. They're not going to stop calling a Mac a Mac. The name is iconic and indelible.
You are ignoring my point that many of Apple's product names actually include the word "Apple". I gave several examples. Under your silly theory the "Apple TV 4K" is Manufacturer-=Apple, Product=TV, Subproduct=4K. That's nonsense. The actual product name is "Apple TV". It is not "TV". You can't trademark a generic word like "TV" so the Apple product trademark is actually "Apple TV."
And I admit there's only a 15% chance that Apple will rebrand Macs, but if they do, you need to get down on your knees and beg for forgiveness.
Well, that hardly seems fair. At what point when your silly idea doesn’t happen will you be getting down on your knees to beg forgiveness?
I've already admitted there's an 85% chance that you will be right. So if you end up being right, I've got no need to apologize. In fact, I'll go so far as to say there's a 98% chance you will be right. But if I'm right it's like shooting a bulls-eye from 2 miles away with a pistol. And everyone, including you, will need to acknowledge my prescience.
Apple is not adding word “Apple” to it’s products, but apple symbol. It’s just the way you read the pictogram. With your logic, next Mac would be called
Computer, Computer Pro, Notebook etc. Silly.
What I can see coming is
Mac, Mac Pro, MacBook etc.. however, such a chage feels so unnecessary to me. “Mac” is an iconic differentiator of other personal computer, than “PC”. They’ll never drop it I hope.
Comments
The issue with mid-90s Apple was that they had a lot of machines with overlapping price points and capabilities, with confusing names that gave no indication of how the machines compared to each other. This upcoming range is really not at all complicated - for the most part, there's a clear delineation by size, and there will also be a clear delineation by price. There will only be two models that are the same size as each other - the 12 and 12 Pro - and then it will be clear by name and price which is the more capable device.
...and so did I, again.
I claim old age.
Your idea isn't what you think it is. You're either calling the device "Mini," "Pro," and "Air," and including the ever-present Apple manufacturer name in front of that, or you're calling them Apple Apple Mini, Apple Apple Pro, and Apple Apple Air. I suppose there's a third option, and you're eliminating the name of the device entirely, and skipping from A-> C. That's impenetrably confusing, too.
I was being polite calling that awkward. It is (still trying to be polite) completely, irrevocably nonsensical, and based on a nonexistent premise you've made up, that the name Mac is somehow problematic from a marketing standpoint. It isn't. They're not going to stop calling a Mac a Mac. The name is iconic and indelible.
And I admit there's only a 15% chance that Apple will rebrand Macs, but if they do, you need to get down on your knees and beg for forgiveness.
To be fair Apple's first computers were called "Apple". I think the idea is great in theory but bad in practice.
I like the idea of the Mac being rebranded as something new and better but I do not think "Apple" is it in 2020 when people know Apple as the umbrella company for great products.
Um What? There was no "7s" and there were older "s" models like iPhone 4s and 5s.
Um. Wut?
The 's' models were always incremental improvements from a more major redesign the year prior. If the rumors are correct, this year's phone will be a more major redesign, Further more, if they add 5G capabilities as most people expect, I don't think they'll want to link it to the 11 by calling it an '11s.' They'll want to call it something more differentiating.
A new computer?
"No, an Apple Mini!"
A new iPhone?
"NO, AN APPLE MINI!!"
A new iPad?
"YES! FFS!!! How many times to I have to say it!!!"
You should have said so the first time!
"I DID! I was perfectly clear about it! An Apple Mini"
With your logic, next Mac would be called
Computer, Computer Pro, Notebook etc. Silly.
What I can see coming is
Mac, Mac Pro, MacBook etc.. however, such a chage feels so unnecessary to me. “Mac” is an iconic differentiator of other personal computer, than “PC”. They’ll never drop it I hope.